Aerosol odor eliminating compositions containing alkylene glycol(s)

- S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.

Aerosol odor eliminating compositions are described which are aqueous based and include at least one alkylene glycol, at least one surfactant wherein one or more of the at least one surfactant has an HLB of about 7 to about 20, compressed gas propellant, at least one fragrance, a buffering system and water. The composition excludes inclusion of a low molecular weight monohydric. The compositions have a volatile organic content (VOC) of less than 5.0% of the total composition based on 100 wt. %, or alternatively, a VOC of less than 0.1% as to the total composition based on 100 wt. % in absence of the wt. % of the active fragrant material of the fragrance. The compositions additionally have a consistent spray rate at multiple pressure ranges.

Skip to: Description  ·  Claims  ·  References Cited  · Patent History  ·  Patent History
Description
FIELD OF INVENTION

Aerosol compositions are provided for eliminating airborne malodors. The compositions are aqueous-based and include compressed gas, fragrance and a solubilizing system for at least the fragrance. The compositions have a low to almost zero volatile organic content (VOC).

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

A wide variety of deodorizing compositions are known in the art, the most common of which contain perfumes or fragrances to mask malodors. Odor masking is the intentional concealment of one odor by the addition of another. In order to mask odors using perfumes or fragrances, however, high levels of fragrance are generally needed to ensure that the malodor is no longer noticeable or suitably masked and the masking techniques do nothing to remove or modify the source of the odor. Aerosol spray air sanitizers are known in the art to effectively kill airborne microorganisms and mitigate airborne malodorants. The active ingredients in currently available aerosol air sanitizers vary. One family of products relies upon glycols, such as propylene glycol, dipropylene glycol and triethylene glycol. The most popular is triethylene glycol, the active ingredient in the OUST® family of products sold by S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. Triethylene glycol (TEG) is known to kill certain airborne bacteria. TEG is also safe for use in aerosol sprays. Because the solubility of TEG in conventional hydrocarbon propellants is generally low, additional solvents, such as ethanol, are added to TEG-based aerosol compositions to increase the solubility of TEG in hydrocarbon propellants. Ethanol is also used as a co-solvent to increase volatility of the product and to make other components, such as fragrance oils, more soluble.

However, the use of ethanol and other conventional solvents in combination with conventional short C-chain aliphatic propellants limits the amount of TEG that can be included in a single-phase formulation. For example, the concentration of TEG in a single-phase aerosol composition using conventional hydrocarbon propellant is limited to no more than 6-8 wt. % with 30 wt. % propellant and the rest being ethanol. The use of TEG in amounts that exceed 12 or 15 wt. % normally results in a two-phase system, thereby requiring the consumer to vigorously shake the canister before use and foreclosing use of the formulation in a continuous or automated spray device. Single-phase aerosol products that do not require vigorous shaking are advantageous because consumers often forget to shake multi-phase products that require mixing and, because the performance of single-phase aerosol products is not dependent upon mixing, the performance of single-phase aerosols can be more consistent. In contrast, the efficacy of multi-phase aerosol products that require mixing can be somewhat inconsistent, especially if the user is physically unable to shake the can as vigorously as required.

Both ethanol and hydrocarbon propellants are considered to be volatile organic compounds. The content of volatile organic compounds in aerosol air sanitizers has the potential to be regulated by federal and/or state regulatory agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air Resource Board (CARB). An existing single-phase TEG-based aerosol composition typically has a volatile organic compound content of more than 90 wt. %. By increasing the content of TEG, the volatile organic compound content of the aerosol composition can be reduced as well.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Aerosol odor eliminating compositions are provided. The aerosol compositions are aqueous based and include at least one alkylene glycol, at least one surfactant, compressed gas propellant, at least one fragrance, and buffering system. The alkylene glycol and/or surfactant serve to solubilize the fragrance and other component(s) which may be present requiring solubilization, e.g. preservative. The aerosol odor eliminating compositions do not contain a low molecular weight monohydric alcohol. The compositions have a low to almost zero volatile organic content (VOC). Further, the compositions have a good and substantially consistent spray rate over a pressure range of 130-180 psig at room temperature, it being understood that this pressure refers to the initial pressure in a container. The pressure will drop at a linear rate over the life of the product. However, the compositions of the invention have a substantially consistent particle size and spray rate for at least about 70 to 75% of the life of the aerosol in the container. Pressure drop occurs during the life of aerosols due to the changing headspace in the container. Consistency in particle size and spray rate over a substantial period of the life of the aerosol is therefore advantageous.

Further advantages of the aerosol odor eliminating compositions include that the compositions are water based, as opposed to solvent based (e.g. alcohol containing), and yet provide solubilization of one or more fragrances contained in the compositions resulting in single phase compositions. The compositions do not have an oily-feeling fall-out onto surfaces and provide a uniform mixture resulting in a consistent or substantially consistent spray rate over a wide pressure range for good dispersion of the active ingredients in the compositions.

Further, the aerosol compositions have a volatile organic content (VOC) of less than 5.0% as to the total composition based on 100 wt. %, preferably less than 3.0% as to the total composition, most preferably less than 1.0%; and further less than 0.5%; or, alternatively expressed, the aerosol compositions have a VOC of less than 0.1% of the total composition based on 100 wt. % in the absence of the active fragrance content based on wt. %, preferably less than 0.05%, and most preferably less than 0.01% in the absence of fragrance content. The VOC is provided at a low to almost zero amount based on primarily the absence of need for alcohol as a solvent and hydrocarbons as propellant.

The buffering system of the aerosol compositions provided is preferably based on citric acid and/or a citrate compound, i.e., the buffering system is citric acid alone, a citrate compound (e.g. an alkali metal citrate) alone, or a combination of citric acid and a citrate compound. Further, useful in themselves or includable with any of the above buffering systems is a phosphate buffer compound, such as an alkali metal hydrogen phosphate, such as dipotassium hydrogen phosphate and potassium dihydrogen phosphate, or another buffer component such as an alkali metal hydroxide or alkali metal bicarbonate, for example, sodium hydroxide or sodium bicarbonate. A buffering system containing only the citric acid and/or the citrate compound is in particular advantageous as not containing a phosphorous-containing component, such are not being available for use in all geographic locations based on present or potential state or country regulations. The aqueous-based compositions as described herein, therefore, provide a combination which can be adequately buffered without the need for inclusion of a phosphorous-containing compound. Other advantages of the citric acid and/or citrate buffering system include that such does not result in any color change to the overall composition when incorporated therein and is stable for an extended period of time which provides for an extended shelf and storage life.

The novel features and benefits of the aerosol odor eliminating compositions will be further appreciated in view of the detailed description below.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 shows graphically the average spray rate for samples evaluated at 170, 160 and 150 psig.

FIG. 2 shows graphically the average mass median diameter (MMD) of particles for samples evaluated at 170, 160 and 150 psig.

FIG. 3 shows graphically the results of a comparison test as to fragrance intensity over time.

 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The aerosol odor eliminating compositions provided herein include (a) at least one alkylene glycol, (b) at least one surfactant, (c) compressed gas propellant present at a maximum of approximately 180 psig at room temperature, (d) a buffering system, (e) at least one fragrance, and (f) water. The composition does not include any low molecular weight monohydric alcohol. The composition has a volatile organic content (VOC) of less than 5.0% for the total composition based on 100 wt. % or, alternatively, a VOC of less than 0.1% for the total composition based on 100 wt. % in the absence of the at least one fragrance based on the wt. % of the active fragrance material therein. The fragrance is solubilized by the surfactant, or the alkylene glycol, or a combination of the surfactant and the alkylene glycol. The pH of the composition is about 4 to about 8, preferably about 5 to about 7.

Elimination of odor(s) in the air is provided using the aqueous-based aerosol composition containing at least one alkylene glycol, such as triethylene glycol or propylene glycol. Additional odor elimination properties can be attributed to other composition components present, such as the surfactant system, a pH buffering system and the fragrance compounds.

Alkylene glycols in aerosol air compositions fight malodors. The mechanism of odor elimination by which an aerosol droplet containing alkylene glycols interacts with odor molecules first involve solubilization of the malodors followed by “rain out” of the aerosol droplet. Thereafter, chemical and physical reactions between the malodors, and the surfactants, fragrances and pH stabilized liquid droplet can take place.

As the aerosol product is sprayed, a fine mist of liquid droplets is dispersed in the air. The dispersed liquid droplets, which have a significant surface area, begin to solubilize the malodor compounds present in the air. This initial removal of the odor molecule is governed by gas/liquid partitioning. The partitioning is an equilibrium process in which odors in the gas phase migrate into the liquid droplet to establish an equilibrium governed by the partitioning coefficient of the system. This process can be described using Henry's Law which defines an equilibrium constant as a ratio of the amount of gas dissolved in a given liquid and the partial pressure of that gas in the gas phase, as in the following equation:

K = p c
where K is the equilibrium constant known as the Henry's Law constant, p is the partial pressure of the odor above the solution and c is the concentration of the odor in the solution.

As the gas/particle partitioning is taking place, the aerosol particles begin to settle out of the air. This settling process, referred to as “raining out”, occurs as the liquid droplets begin to fall out of the air. This raining out process carries along the malodors already absorbed into or adsorbed onto the droplets, thereby removing them from the air.

Once the odor molecules are absorbed into the liquid droplets, one of several secondary mechanisms can further interact with the malodor, to limit its ability to re-release from the aerosol droplets. The secondary processes of odor elimination can involve the solubilization of the malodor by the surfactant system, neutralization through acid-base chemistry, and/or chemical interaction with fragrance molecules.

The presence of a surfactant system in the aerosol composition can lead to the formation of self-assembled surfactant structures as a thin film on the aerosol droplet or as micellar structures within the aerosol droplet. These surfactant structures are typically used to solubilize the fragrance into the liquid droplet but can also interact with the malodor molecules which have partitioned into the droplet. This interaction can lead to the solubilization of malodors either from within the liquid droplet or at the surface/air interface. The solubilization of the odors by self-assembled structures can lead to a reduction in the gas phase concentration of the malodor, resulting in further odor elimination.

The aerosol system has a pH of about 4 to about 8, which is achieved using a buffering system. The buffered solution in the aerosol particles can interact with the solubilized malodors through an acid-base chemistry to further neutralize the odors. For example, an amine malodor such as ammonia which is solubilized by the aerosol particle can have a portion of the free amine ionized to the ammonium ion due to the presence of the buffering system. The ammonium ion can then form ammonium phosphate, in the event of a phosphate-based buffering system, which has a vapor pressure significantly less than the free amine and therefore is less likely to re-release from the particle.

The presence of fragrance molecules solubilized in the aerosol droplet with the malodor molecules can lead to interactions between the two molecules. It is widely known that some common fragrance components are able to interact with malodor molecules leading to the formation of less offensive odors. This interaction may occur in the droplet after the malodor is absorbed or by the fragrance molecules released from the aerosol during use.

The overall mechanism for odor elimination is the solubilization of the odor molecules into the aerosol droplet followed by the “raining out” of the aerosol particles from the air. The solubilized odor can then be further removed by one or more of the secondary processes which includes: secondary solubilization by the surfactant system, neutralization by acid-base chemistry and/or the chemical interaction with fragrance molecules.

As to the alkylene glycol component of the aerosol odor elimination composition, the at least one alkylene glycol is included in an amount of about 0.1 to about 10 wt. % of the composition, preferably about 0.1 to about 5 wt. %, and most preferably about 0.5 to about 1.5 wt. %. The alkylene glycol component serves to eliminate odor in an environment to which the composition is applied in use, as well as serves as a component of the solubilizing system of the composition, e.g. for solubilizing the fragrance, preservative or other component which may be included and is not soluble in the aqueous carrier of the composition.

Alkylene glycols suitable for use in the described aerosol odor eliminating compositions include mono-, di- or tri-alkylene glycols, such as for example triethylene glycol, propylene glycol, dipropylene glycol, and mixtures thereof. A preferred mixture is about 0.1 to about 3.0 wt. % triethylene glycol and about 0.1 to about 3.0 wt. % propylene glycol.

As to the surfactant, the at least one surfactant is included in the odor eliminating composition in an amount of about 0.1 to about 4 wt. % of the composition, preferably about 0.1 to about 2 wt. % and most preferably about 0.1 to about 1.0 wt. %. The surfactant serves as a solubilizer alone or in conjunction with the alkylene glycol component for the fragrance, preservative or other component which may be present which is not soluble in the aqueous carrier of the composition. The at least one surfactant includes one or more surfactants having a hydrophile-lipophile-balance (HLB) of about 7 to about 20, preferably about 9 to about 18 and most preferably about 12 to about 16. Surfactants otherwise suitable for use can be nonionic, anionic, amphoteric, cationic, or a combination thereof. Preferably, the surfactant is one or more nonionic surfactants having an HLB within the above described ranges.

Nonionic surfactants suitable for use in the described aerosol odor eliminating compositions include alkoxylated compounds such as, for example, fatty alcohol alkoxylates, alkoxylated polyol fatty acid esters; alkyl polyglucosides; alkanolamides, including fatty acid alkanolamides ; fatty alcohol polyalkyleneglycol ethers; oxo-alcohol polyalkylene glycol ethers; alkylphenol polyalkylene glycol ethers; fatty alcohol poly-poly glycol ethers (e.g. ethylene oxide/propylene oxide adducts); and alkyl dimethyl amine oxide, as well as nonionic polymers such as for example ethylene oxide/propylene oxide block copolymers. The alkoxy component is preferably ethoxy.

Specific preferred examples of nonionic surfactants suitable for inclusion are alkyloxypolyethyleneoxyethanol, such as the secondary C6-C17 alcohol ethoxylates with 3-6 ethylene oxide units; hydrogenated castor oil ethoxylate; octylphenol ethoxylate; alkyl polyglucoside; polyethylene glycol cocoamine; and the like.

Anionic surfactants suitable for use include soaps, alkyl benzene sulfonates, alkane sulfonates, α-olefin sulfonates; α-sulfo fatty acid methyl esters; fatty alcohol sulfates or alkyl sulfates; alkyl ether sulfates including fatty alcohol ether sulfates and oxo-alcohol ether sulfates; and the like, as well as combinations thereof.

Amphoteric surfactants suitable for use include alkyl betaines, alkyl sulfo betaines and the like, as well as combinations thereof.

Cationic surfactants suitable for use include tetraalkyl ammonium chlorides, and the like, as well as combinations thereof.

As to the compressed gas propellant, the compressed gas is included in an amount of about 0.1 to about 5 wt. %, preferably about 0.1 to about 3.5 wt. %, and most preferably about 0.1 to about 1.0 wt. %. The compressed gas propellant is useful in the stated amounts for providing a suitable particle size and spray rate over the life of the product when the pressure within the container is sufficient to provide an acceptable spray. The initial pressure of the container can be in a range of about 130 to about 180 psig at room temperature. The pressure will drop at a linear rate over the life of the product. However, the compositions of the invention will have a substantially consistent particle size and spray rate for at least about 70 to about 75% of the life of the aerosol. This higher pressure leads to improved break-up of aerosol particles which results in smaller sized droplets. The particle size is preferably within the conventional and accepted range for compressed gases, e.g. about 60-80 microns for the majority of the life of the product (i.e., about 100 to about 50% of the product life) and about 90-100 microns at the end of product life (i.e., about 50 to about 10% of the product life).

Compressed gases suitable for inclusion in the aerosol odor elimination composition are, for example, nitrogen, air, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, inert gases, and mixtures thereof. The propellants useful in the present invention are non-hydrocarbons.

As to the buffering system of the compositions, the buffering system is includable in an amount of about 0.01 to about 5 wt. %, preferably about 0.1 to about 3.0 wt. % and, most preferably, about 0.1 to about 1.0 wt. % of the composition. The buffering system in a preferred embodiment is composed of citric acid alone, a citrate compound alone, or a combination of citric acid and a citrate compound. This citric acid and/or citrate buffering system provides the desired buffering while remaining stable over an extended period of time and not providing any color change to the underlying composition. The stability is important to provide for an extended shelf or storage life for the composition.

Alternate buffering components may also be utilized in the buffering system, either in combination with the citric acid and/or citrate compound described above, as well as either or alone or in combination. Examples of such alternate components include alkali metal phosphate compounds such as dipotassium hydrogen phosphate and/or potassium dihydrogen phosphate; alkali metal bicarbonate, e.g., sodium bicarbonate; and alkali metal hydroxide, e.g. sodium hydroxide.

As to the fragrance component of the aerosol odor eliminating composition, the fragrance is includable in an amount that is sufficient to deliver a pleasant smell that can be perceived by a consumer and that treats at least a substantial portion of an airborne malodor. The fragrance is preferably present in an amount that not only completely masks airborne malodors, but also delivers a pleasant smell to be perceived by a consumer. In one embodiment, the fragrance is present in an amount ranging from about 0.01 to about 10 wt. %, more preferably from about 0.01 to about 5 wt. %, and most preferably from about 0.01 to about 3 wt. %.

Fragrances normally are composed of a mixture of a number of fragrant materials, each of which has a particular fragrant sense. The number of fragrant materials in a fragrance is typically ten or more. The range of fragrant materials used may vary. The materials come from a variety of chemical classes, but in general are water-insoluble oils. In many instances, the molecular weight of a fragrance material is in excess of 150, but does not exceed 300.

The fragrance may comprise one or more fragrant materials or materials that provide chemically active vapors. In one embodiment, the fragrance can comprise and/or include volatile, fragrant compounds including, but not limited to natural botanic extracts, essences, fragrance oils, synthetic fragrant materials and so forth. As is known in the art, many essential oils and other natural plant derivatives contain large percentages of highly volatile scents. In this regard, numerous essential oils, essences, and scented concentrates are commonly available from companies in the fragrance and food businesses. Exemplary oils and extracts include, but are not limited to, those derived from the following plants: almond, amyris, anise, armoise, bergamot, cabreuva, calendula, canaga, cedar, chamomile, coconut, eucalyptus, fennel, jasmine, juniper, lavender, lemon, orange, palm, peppermint, quassia, rosemary, thyme, and so forth. The fragrant materials are considered the “active” component of the fragrance. The fragrance may or may not include a carrier for the fragrant material.

The aerosol elimination compositions are aqueous based. Accordingly, water is present in a balance amount to equal 100% when combined with the other components making up the total composition. The water can be reverse osmosis (RO) water, deionized water, tap water, or the like. Preferably, RO water is utilized.

The volatile organic content (VOC) of the total composition is less than 5.0% based on 100 wt. % of the components of the composition, preferably less than 3.0% and most preferably less than 1.0%, and further less than 0.5%. Alternatively, the VOC of the total composition based on 100 wt. % in absence of the wt. % of the active fragrant material is less than 0.1%, preferably less than 0.05% and, most preferably, less than 0.01%.

The pH of the composition is from about 4 to about 8, preferably about 5 to about 7.

Generally fragrances are pH dependent, can discolor the composition to which they are added and can disrupt the stability of the composition to which they are added. Accordingly, it is important to solubilize the fragrance component to render the composition stable. Water-based systems are problematic for solubilizing a fragrance since fragrances generally are present partially or totally as an oil. In the past, solubilization has been provided with a volatile solvent such as ethanol, which necessarily results in a higher VOC in the composition. In the aerosol eliminating composition, a volatile solvent for solubilizing the fragrance is not provided. Rather, solubilization of the fragrance is provided by the at least one nonionic surfactant and/or the at least one alkylene glycol. Thus, the VOC of the composition is maintained at a low level. No alcohol or other volatile solvent is present in the aerosol elimination composition of the invention. The VOC of the composition is thus essentially based on that of the fragrance component and any additive component, e.g. a preservative, which may contain a volatile ingredient. Other additives as known for inclusion in an aerosol odor treating composition are also includable in the compositions described herein to the extent they conform to the limitations described herein.

The spray dispenser including a base container and spray head with valve and actuator can be constructed of any conventional material. The container is preferably aluminum and the spray head is preferably all or substantially all plastic. The container is capable of withstanding internal pressure of from about 130 to about 180 psig at room temperature. The spray head is constructed necessarily to disperse the contents of the container in the form of a spray of fine or finely divided particles or droplets. As set forth above, a conventional and accepted range of particle sizes for compressed gas aerosols is about 60 to about 80 microns over the substantial majority of the life of the container (i.e., about 100 to about 50% of the life) and about 90-100 microns at the end of the life of the container (i.e., about 50 to about 10% of the life).

The average spray rate of the aerosol odor eliminating composition upon dispensing is in the general range of about 0.5 to about 2.5 g/sec, mid-range of about 0.75 to 2.25 g/sec and a preferred range of about 1 to about 2 grams/second (g/sec), more preferably about 1.1 to about 1.9 g/sec and most preferably about 1.2 to about 1.8 g/sec. The average spray rate is determined by providing an aerosol composition sample and pressurizing to various elevated pressures to insure acceptable spray performance at the higher end of possible ranges. A specific example is to provide three groups of six identical samples and pressurizing with nitrogen gas to 150 psig, 160 psig and 170 psig and spray test each sample using a Malvern Masterizer S volume-based particle analyzer. The Malvern analyzer obtains a Sauter mean diameter (SMD), defined as the ratio of the volume diameter, and the mass median diameter (MMD) for a particle diameter which 10%, 50% and 90% of the volume sampled is below the measured particle diameter. Test samples were sprayed down from a 100% full can to a 25% full can with data measurements taken at 100%, 75%, 50% and 25% intervals.

To illustrate the spray performance of a composition of the invention, a preferred composition is described below as is the spray testing to which the composition was subjected and the results of such spray testing. The results show that the spray rates are consistent over a varied pressure range.

Spray Rate Evaluation

The purpose of the tests described below is to evaluate the spray performance of aerosol odor elimination compositions using a standard container and a standard production Glencoe type actuator cap at elevated pressures of 150 psig, 160 psig and 170 psig. To obtain an,acceptable spray pattern for a compressed gas aerosol, the actuator should contain a mechanical break-up unit (MBU). The function of the MBU is to break up the liquid product as it is dispensed from the container. Compositions of the invention provide for improved spray in various aspects as described herein based on the make-up of the composition itself as opposed to a particular actuator structure. However, the spray performance of the present described compositions can be maximized by varying one or more internal mechanisms of the MBU. Such mechanisms include, for example, the orifice diameter (which preferably is between about 0.010″ to about 0.015″ for room sprays), orifice land length, spin chamber diameter, spin chamber depth, number of channels (tangential), channel depth, channel width and the like.

The spray testing was conducted on aerosol samples having the composition set forth below that were pressurized to various elevated pressures to insure acceptable spray performance at the higher end of possible pressure ranges. Samples were built with Seaquist actuators (Ref. #GL000158, Model DU3020 which has an orifice diameter of 0.012″.). Three groups of six samples were pressurized with N2 to 150 psig, 160 psig and 170 psig were spray tested using a Malvern Masterizer S volume based particle analyzer. The Malvern analyzer obtained the Sauter mean diameter (SMD), defined as the ratio of the volume diameter and the surface area diameter, and the mass median diameter (MMD) for a particle diameter which 10%, 50% and 90% of the volume sampled is below the measured particle diameter. Test samples were sprayed down from 100% full can to 25% full can with four data measurements taken at 100%, 75%, 50% and 25% intervals. Spray rates were also calculated independent of the Malvern analyzer using a stop watch and analytical balance to confirm measurements.

As shown in FIG. 1, the spray down rates of each pressure group (i.e., 170 psig, 160 psig and 150 psig) were very close when compared to each other and were within about 0.1 gram/second at each spray interval. Spray testing results for particle size (see FIG. 2) also indicated the particle mass median diameters (MMD) at 50% to be consistently close when compared to each pressure group and within about 5 μm at each data point during the spray down.

The spray test results are shown below in Tables 1, 2 and 3 and in FIGS. 1 and 2 for six test units pressurized to 170 psig, 160 psig and 150 psig respectively. The contents from test samples were collected and analyzed for pH. The measured pH was 7.3. The composition formula was as follows:

Test Composition 1 (Invention)

Component Wt. % Reverse Osmosis Water 95.93 Triethylene Glycol (98%) 1.0 Nitrogen Gas 0.68 Propylene Glycol 0.5 Fragrance 0.5 Hydrogenated Castor Oil 60 Ethoxylate 0.47 Dipotassium Hydrogen Phosphate 0.32 Secondary C6-C17 Alcohol Ethoxylate (3-6 EO) 0.28 Potassium Dihydrogen Phosphate 0.17 Preservative* 0.15 100% *2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one.

TABLE 1 Spray test results for 170 psig samples Sauter Mean MMD MMD MMD Spray 170 Diameter 10% 50% 90% Rate PSIG Sample# (μm) (μm) (μm) (μm) (gm/sec.) 100% 1 41.13 25.08 55.94 104.05 1.83 Full 2 55.10 32.99 67.75 120.07 1.99 Can 3 51.58 30.61 67.83 112.42 2.03 4 54.14 34.91 66.44 107.93 1.75 5 52.21 31.78 66.44 111.59 1.79 6 52.48 31.82 64.62 109.32 1.70 Average 51 31 65 111 1.85 75% 1 43.53 26.98 56.86 102.38 1.46 Full 2 52.30 33.99 68.93 113.42 1.51 Can 3 50.04 33.09 67.83 114.00 1.54 4 58.53 42.26 73.61 113.19 1.47 5 59.34 38.36 71.98 114.82 1.44 6 49.11 34.64 66.16 110.12 1.35 Average 52 35 68 111 1.46 50% 1 49.33 29.66 59.20 103.52 1.34 Full 2 51.66 32.53 61.89 110.33 1.35 Can 3 58.20 34.80 71.57 122.09 1.32 4 70.01 46.25 78.87 119.32 1.27 5 58.62 39.86 71.75 116.94 1.24 6 56.59 34.51 68.22 113.36 1.20 Average 57 36 69 114 1.29 25% 1 53.52 31.41 64.69 117.69 1.20 Full 2 59.58 36.03 70.51 122.17 1.21 Can 3 62.67 37.58 76.88 127.47 1.20 4 65.94 39.78 80.14 132.37 1.15 5 61.36 37.09 74.22 126.70 1.10 6 59.22 35.46 71.00 124.42 1.08 Average 60 36 73 125 1.16

TABLE 2 Spray test results for 160 psig samples Sauter Mean MMD MMD MMD Spray 160 Diameter 10% 50% 90% Rate PSIG Sample# (μm) (μm) (μm) (μm) (gm/sec.) 100% 1 53.99 32.07 68.47 115.50 1.85 Full 2 49.11 29.62 60.64 102.58 1.68 Can 3 43.82 29.89 62.92 110.86 1.88 4 48.94 28.81 62.49 112.59 1.83 5 47.36 31.15 60.60 102.74 1.78 6 52.42 33.62 64.32 104.82 1.77 Average 49 31 63 108 1.80 75% 1 45.11 28.58 58.11 108.07 1.37 Full 2 51.97 31.06 63.44 108.69 1.41 Can 3 54.35 36.75 70.81 115.34 1.55 4 51.88 31.68 64.70 111.58 1.54 5 48.24 31.30 62.76 107.82 1.47 6 53.20 38.84 66.88 105.44 1.46 Average 51 33 64 109 1.47 50% 1 53.01 31.16 64.11 111.65 1.15 Full 2 59.13 37.04 68.52 109.67 1.22 Can 3 63.04 40.62 73.88 117.56 1.36 4 56.05 33.76 68.36 116.39 1.39 5 57.30 35.60 69.64 114.97 1.30 6 60.03 37.48 72.35 116.41 1.29 Average 58 36 69 114 1.28 25% 1 55.47 32.97 66.37 114.49 1.02 Full 2 55.36 31.68 68.04 120.27 1.09 Can 3 63.34 39.06 74.98 129.32 1.20 4 57.30 33.35 69.54 125.59 1.20 5 52.03 33.39 73.39 140.37 1.16 6 60.83 36.94 72.82 124.75 1.16 Average 57 35 71 126 1.14

TABLE 3 Spray test results for 150 psig samples Sauter Mean MMD MMD MMD Spray 150 Diameter 10% 50% 90% Rate PSIG Sample# (μm) (μm) (μm) (μm) (gm/sec.) 100% 1 55.06 32.95 70.26 118.74 1.75 Full 2 49.47 29.43 64.08 109.32 1.66 Can 3 40.65 25.52 56.28 96.13 1.67 4 44.59 28.59 61.32 107.16 1.84 5 43.77 27.37 58.48 102.22 1.67 6 42.03 27.65 57.42 96.37 1.67 Average 46 29 61 105 1.71 75% 1 56.66 33.65 71.47 122.32 1.46 Full 2 45.50 27.92 61.03 108.45 1.42 Can 3 41.42 28.54 61.64 107.13 1.45 4 50.28 31.07 62.05 106.95 1.49 5 49.75 33.04 63.47 106.70 1.43 6 44.91 28.74 62.33 108.04 1.41 Average 48 30 64 110 1.44 50% 1 59.89 36.27 72.51 119.28 1.35 Full 2 52.94 31.55 65.09 113.06 1.26 Can 3 53.89 32.27 66.37 113.24 1.25 4 56.59 35.63 66.59 112.11 1.31 5 56.52 35.38 66.53 111.51 1.20 6 59.72 37.56 70.67 112.96 1.25 Average 57 35 68 114 1.27 25% 1 62.02 36.56 75.18 132.59 1.21 Full 2 59.49 35.01 72.38 130.01 1.11 Can 3 56.89 33.94 69.87 121.31 1.14 4 58.33 35.04 69.53 122.98 1.16 5 59.15 35.22 71.06 124.43 1.05 6 59.01 35.06 72.21 124.22 1.10 Average 59 35 72 126 1.13

To illustrate spray rate consistency at the low end of tolerances, i.e., compositions pressurized at 133 psig, four inventive compositions were tested as set forth below together with the test results in Table 4.

Test Composition 1—As described above.

Wt. % Wt. % Wt. % Test Test Test Composition Composition Composition Components 2 3 4 Reverse Osmosis Water 95.83 96.85 96.95 Citric Acid (50%) 0.3 0.3 0 Sodium Citrate Dihydrate 0.3 0.3 0 Triethylene Glycol 98%) 1.0 0 0 Hydrogenated Castor Oil 0.46 0.47 0.47 60 Ethoxylate Secondary C6-C17 Alcohol 0.28 0.28 0.28 Ethoxylate Fragrance 0.5 0.5 0.5 Propylene Glycol 0.5 0.47 0.47 Preservative* 0.15 0.15 0.15 Nitrogen Gas 0.68 0.68 0.68 Dipotassium Hydrogen 0 0 0.33 Phosphate Potassium Dihydrogen 0 0 0.17 Phosphate 100% 100% 100% *2-methyl-isothiazolin-3-one

TABLE 4 Spray Rate Test Initial Wt. Final Wt. Difference Spray rate Comp.#/Sample# (g) (g) (g) (g/s) 1 - 1 340.80 258.27 82.53 1.38 1 - 2 341.00 260.36 80.64 1.34 1 - 3 343.90 266.44 77.46 1.29 1 - 4 343.63 263.15 80.48 1.34 1 - 5 340.13 268.13 72.00 1.20 1 - 6 339.52 265.62 73.90 1.23 Average = 1.30 STD DEV = 0.07 2 - 1 339.61 258.66 80.95 1.35 2 - 2 339.84 258.31 81.53 1.36 2 - 3 339.36 257.28 82.08 1.37 2 - 4 340.01 266.16 73.85 1.23 2 - 5 342.68 265.59 77.09 1.28 2 - 6 342.96 265.53 77.43 1.29 Average = 1.31 STD DEV = 0.05 3 - 1 343.07 268.98 74.09 1.23 3 - 2 341.00 265.57 75.43 1.26 3 - 3 341.91 261.35 80.56 1.34 3 - 4 341.23 263.62 77.61 1.29 3 - 5 341.27 264.04 77.23 1.29 3 - 6 331.59 249.12 82.47 1.37 Average = 1.30 STD DEV = 0.05 4 - 1 341.40 267.45 73.95 1.23 4 - 2 340.73 262.23 78.50 1.31 4 - 3 340.85 262.86 77.99 1.30 4 - 4 343.41 258.85 84.56 1.41 4 - 5 344.12 271.14 72.98 1.22 4 - 6 342.61 265.61 77.00 1.28 Average = 1.29 STD DEV = 0.07

A sensory evaluation was also conducted with regard to Test Composition 3 and a commercially available air spray as sold under the name “Febreze® Air Effects®” Spring & Renewal™ as sold by The Procter & Gamble Company. The evaluation was to determine on a comparison basis the intensity of the fragrance over time.

The test method used a Trained Intensity Panel (19 panelists per test session present in a 800 cubic foot room. Panelists entered the room in small groups (4-5 people per group). The panelists evaluated the pair of products. Three 2-product randomizations were used for the testing. To learn fragrance longevity, the products were each disposed as a 4 gram dose with no refreshing. The evaluations were at every 10 minutes beginning at 5 minutes after the initial treatment through 45 minutes.) The fragrance was rated at 10 minute intervals on a scale of from 0 to 7 with 7 being the highest intensity, and the ratings then averaged to provide a fragrance intensity rating number. The fragrance ratings for the test samples are set forth in Table 5 below and shown graphically in FIG. 3.

TABLE 5 Time Sample 5 Min. 15 Min. 25 Min. 35 Min. 45 Min. 55 Min. Febreze ® 6.3 5.9 4.9 4.5 3.8 2.9 Spring & Renewal ™ Test 6.8 6.3 5.3 4.5 4.0 3.5 Composition 3

Both compositions decreased in intensity at the same rate. Directionally, as shown in FIG. 3, the Febreze® composition is lower than Test Composition 3 of the invention.

The exemplary embodiments herein disclosed are not intended to be exhaustive or to unnecessarily limit the scope of the invention. The exemplary embodiments were chosen and described in order to explain the principles of the present invention so that others skilled in the art may practice the invention. As will be apparent to one skilled in the art, various modifications can be made within the scope of the aforesaid description. Such modifications being within the ability of one skilled in the art form a part of the present invention and are embraced by the appended claims.

Claims

1. Aerosol odor treating aqueous-based composition comprising wherein said composition is a single phase composition, has a volatile organic compound content of less than 5.0% based on 100 wt. % of the composition, and does not contain any low molecular weight monohydric alcohol; wherein said at least one fragrance is solubilized by (i) said at least one surfactant, or (ii) said at least one alkylene glycol, or (iii) said at least one surfactant and said at least one alkylene glycol; and wherein said composition has a pH of about 4 to about 8.

(a) about 0.1 to about 10 wt. % of at least one alkylene glycol;
(b) about 0.1 to about 4 wt. % of at least one surfactant, wherein one or more of said at least one surfactant has a hydrophile-lipophile-balance (HLB) of about 7 to about 20;
(c) about 0.1 to about 5 wt. % of compressed gas propellant at maximum of approximately 180 psig at room temperature;
(d) about 0.01 to about 5 wt. % of a buffering system;
(e) about 0.01 to about 10 wt. % at least one fragrance; and
(f) a balance of water;

2. The composition of claim 1, wherein said at least one alkylene glycol is present in an amount of about 0.1 to about 5 wt. %.

3. The composition of claim 1, wherein said at least one alkylene is present in an amount of about 0.5 to about 1.5 wt. %.

4. The composition of claim 1, wherein said at least one alkylene glycol is propylene glycol, or triethylene glycol, or propylene glycol and triethylene glycol.

5. The composition of claim 1, wherein said compressed gas propellant is present in an amount of about 0.1 to about 3.5 wt. %.

6. The composition of claim 1, wherein said buffering system is citric acid, a citrate compound, or a combination of citric acid and a citrate compound.

7. The composition of claim 1, wherein said buffering system is citric acid and at least one of alkali metal citrate, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, sodium bicarbonate and alkali metal hydroxide.

8. The composition of claim 1, wherein said buffering system is citric acid and sodium citrate.

9. The composition of claim 1, wherein said buffering system is citric acid and dipotassium hydrogen phosphate.

10. The composition of claim 1, wherein said buffering system is dipotassium hydrogen phosphate and potassium dihydrogen phosphate.

11. The composition of claim 1, wherein the HLB is of about 9 to about 18.

12. The composition of claim 1, wherein the HLB is of about 12 to about 16.

13. The composition of claim 1, wherein said at least one nonionic surfactant is a hydrogenated castor oil ethoxylate and a secondary alcohol ethoxylate.

14. The composition of claim 1, wherein said compressed gas propellant is nitrogen, air, nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, inert gases, or a mixture thereof.

15. The composition of claim 1, wherein said at least one alkylene glycol includes about 0.1 to about 3.0 wt. % triethylene glycol and about 0.1 to about 3.0 wt. % propylene glycol.

16. The composition of claim 1 further comprising a preservative.

17. Aerosol odor treating aqueous-based composition comprising wherein said composition is a single phase composition, has a volatile organic compound content of less than 5.0% based on 100 wt. % of the composition, and does not contain any low molecular weight monohydric alcohol; wherein said at least one fragrance is solubilized by said two nonionic surfactants and said propylene glycol; and wherein said composition has a pH of about 4 to about 8.

(a) about 0.1 to about 10 wt. % propylene glycol and, optionally, at least one additional alkylene glycol;
(b) about 0.1 to about 4 wt. % of at least one surfactant, wherein said at least one surfactant includes two nonionic surfactants comprising a hydrogenated castor oil ethoxylate and a secondary alcohol ethoxylate;
(c) about 0.1 to about 5 wt. % compressed gas propellant including at least nitrogen at a maximum of 180 psig at room temperature;
(d) about 0.01 to about 10 wt.% of at least one fragrance;
(e) about 0.01 to about 5 wt. % of a buffering system; and
(f) a balance of water;

18. The composition of claim 17 further comprising about 0.1 to about 5 wt. % triethylene glycol as said at least one additional alkylene glycol.

19. The composition of claim 17, wherein said buffering system is citric acid and at least one of alkali metal citrate, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, sodium bicarbonate, and sodium hydroxide.

20. The composition of claim 17, wherein said buffering system is citric acid and sodium citrate.

21. The composition of claim 17, wherein said buffering system is citric acid and dipotassium hydrogen phosphate.

22. The composition of claim 17, wherein said buffering system is dipotassium hydrogen phosphate and potassium dihydrogen phosphate.

23. The composition of claim 17 further comprising a preservative.

Referenced Cited
U.S. Patent Documents
3067024 December 1962 Boies et al.
3433577 March 1969 Shick
3759594 September 1973 Cobb
3864471 February 1975 King et al.
3976617 August 24, 1976 Vasta
4054647 October 18, 1977 Harich et al.
4060639 November 29, 1977 Jacobus et al.
4083954 April 11, 1978 Tsuchiya et al.
4105581 August 8, 1978 Sexsmith
4263275 April 21, 1981 Nandagiri
4294821 October 13, 1981 Neumiller
4333516 June 8, 1982 Krueger et al.
4405354 September 20, 1983 Thomas, II et al.
4584021 April 22, 1986 Bartlett
4668507 May 26, 1987 Tomkins et al.
4676977 June 30, 1987 Haus et al.
4740366 April 26, 1988 Winston et al.
4851212 July 25, 1989 Winston et al.
4882182 November 21, 1989 Halls et al.
4913893 April 3, 1990 Varco et al.
4938416 July 3, 1990 Bertrand et al.
4965063 October 23, 1990 Casey et al.
5047234 September 10, 1991 Dickerson et al.
5064635 November 12, 1991 Casey
5091111 February 25, 1992 Neumiller
5098694 March 24, 1992 Komp et al.
5145604 September 8, 1992 Neumiller
5374614 December 20, 1994 Behan et al.
5444094 August 22, 1995 Malik et al.
5472686 December 5, 1995 Tsubaki et al.
5567354 October 22, 1996 Schwendimann et al.
5573695 November 12, 1996 Targosz
5663134 September 2, 1997 Trinh et al.
5670475 September 23, 1997 Trinh et al.
5679324 October 21, 1997 Lisboa et al.
5720983 February 24, 1998 Malone
5783544 July 21, 1998 Trinh et al.
5874067 February 23, 1999 Lucas et al.
5935554 August 10, 1999 Tomlinson
5939060 August 17, 1999 Trinh et al.
6077318 June 20, 2000 Trinh et al.
6080387 June 27, 2000 Zhou et al.
6146587 November 14, 2000 Morgan
6146621 November 14, 2000 Trinh et al.
6238646 May 29, 2001 Zembrodt
6248135 June 19, 2001 Trinh et al.
6284225 September 4, 2001 Bhatt et al.
6290945 September 18, 2001 Baker et al.
6303111 October 16, 2001 Maurer et al.
6315949 November 13, 2001 Carmello et al.
6346508 February 12, 2002 Leonard et al.
6395236 May 28, 2002 Stewart
6451065 September 17, 2002 Trinh et al.
6454876 September 24, 2002 Ochomogo et al.
6482392 November 19, 2002 Zhou et al.
6495506 December 17, 2002 Massaux et al.
6528014 March 4, 2003 Parkhurst et al.
6632784 October 14, 2003 Massaux et al.
6652842 November 25, 2003 Lucia et al.
6749805 June 15, 2004 Parkhurst et al.
6762157 July 13, 2004 Babinski et al.
6803033 October 12, 2004 McGee et al.
6875732 April 5, 2005 Jurek et al.
6913711 July 5, 2005 McKie et al.
6984617 January 10, 2006 Holland et al.
7014127 March 21, 2006 Valpey, III et al.
7053124 May 30, 2006 Mercurio
7147822 December 12, 2006 Parkhurst et al.
7182941 February 27, 2007 Trinh et al.
7262159 August 28, 2007 Nguyen et al.
7307053 December 11, 2007 Tasz et al.
7374697 May 20, 2008 Kelley et al.
7405242 July 29, 2008 Mercurio et al.
20020004033 January 10, 2002 Sorgenfrey
20020079477 June 27, 2002 Kelley et al.
20030024997 February 6, 2003 Welch et al.
20030086814 May 8, 2003 Meyer
20040026462 February 12, 2004 Moshontz et al.
20040050948 March 18, 2004 Bartels
20040147416 July 29, 2004 Woo et al.
20040209795 October 21, 2004 Vlad
20040223871 November 11, 2004 Woo et al.
20040223943 November 11, 2004 Woo et al.
20050008544 January 13, 2005 Osborn
20050020698 January 27, 2005 Diamond et al.
20050037945 February 17, 2005 Gygax et al.
20050124512 June 9, 2005 Woo et al.
20060025323 February 2, 2006 Vlad
20060030511 February 9, 2006 Makins Holland et al.
20060228250 October 12, 2006 Brown et al.
20060263236 November 23, 2006 Woo et al.
20060292111 December 28, 2006 Valpey et al.
20070021316 January 25, 2007 Dilley et al.
20070122373 May 31, 2007 Woo et al.
20070142264 June 21, 2007 Nguyen et al.
20070161526 July 12, 2007 Vlad et al.
20070172382 July 26, 2007 Uchiyama et al.
20070194040 August 23, 2007 Tasz et al.
20070281877 December 6, 2007 Nguyen et al.
20080003185 January 3, 2008 Valpey et al.
20080003193 January 3, 2008 Rebrovic
20080023569 January 31, 2008 O'Leary et al.
20080025942 January 31, 2008 Weiss et al.
20080069780 March 20, 2008 Weiss et al.
20080248120 October 9, 2008 Anderson et al.
20090016966 January 15, 2009 Anson et al.
20090018044 January 15, 2009 Dreja et al.
20090130046 May 21, 2009 Clark
20090143476 June 4, 2009 Baker, Jr. et al.
20090202446 August 13, 2009 Vlad et al.
20090308944 December 17, 2009 Morrow et al.
Foreign Patent Documents
0571677 December 1993 EP
2007117534 October 2007 WO
Other references
  • Dow Techinal Data Sheet for TERGITOL 15-s-7 Surfactant.
  • U DOW Techinal Data Sheet for TERGITOL 15-s-7 Surfactant, May 15, 2001.
  • PCT/US2011/001078 International Search Report dated Sep. 6, 2011.
Patent History
Patent number: 8287841
Type: Grant
Filed: Jun 18, 2010
Date of Patent: Oct 16, 2012
Patent Publication Number: 20110311460
Assignee: S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. (Racine, WI)
Inventors: Peter N. Nguyen (Racine, WI), Bhaveshkumar Shah (Kenosha, WI)
Primary Examiner: Anoop Singh
Assistant Examiner: Anna Falkowitz
Application Number: 12/801,640